As Uruguay moves to legalise cannabis, is the ‘war on drugs’ finished?

Youngsters wait outside Uruguay’s parliament building while the bill is debated (Picture: AFP/Getty)

In many quarters, Uruguay’s president José Mujica was one of the heroes of 2013.

It wasn’t just students with Bob Marley posters on their walls that celebrated the country’s move to legalise cannabis, which takes effect in April. Many other (presumably) not-under-the-influence voices praised what they saw as a bold, practical move to combat the problems caused by the illegal drug trade. Some even suggested Mujica should win a Nobel prize.

Steve Rolles, senior policy analyst for Transform Drug Policy Foundation and author of How to Regulate Cannabis, advised the Uruguayan president and government on their cannabis reform laws.

‘The Uruguayans looked long and hard at the evidence of the war on drugs approach, which showed that it’s enormously expensive but it neither deters use, nor reduces availability,’ said Rolles.

‘The war on drugs, like US alcohol prohibition, has been an unmitigated disaster. It has, however, achieved a great deal for the gangsters that now control a market worth £260bn a year, not to mention corrupt officials, prison builders and money-laundering banks who’ve all profited hugely from this 50-year folly. They have decided the pragmatic solution is to put the government, rather than gangsters and unregulated dealers, in control of the cannabis market.’

But is Uruguay’s move a one-off, or could others get hooked on the idea?

‘For most Latin American countries, this is not a rhetorical war,’ said Rolles. ‘It’s very real and involves horrific violence on a daily basis. The region’s carried a heavier burden than any other and they’ve had enough. Serving heads of state are now lining up to condemn the war on drugs and support reform. Momentum’s building rapidly. Uruguay is just the first domino.’

The United Nations declared Uruguay’s move a violation of international legal agreements. And many still believe the war to rid the world of drugs is the way forward.

‘The international system for drug control has been quite efficient, while at the same time not perfect,’ says Per Johansson, secretary of the board of the World Federation Against Drugs.

‘Alcohol kills about 2.5m people every year,’ he said. ‘Tobacco kills six million. This is because these drugs are legal and thus widely used. If cannabis became legal all over the world, we’d see large health problems in the same way we have with alcohol and tobacco. There really can’t be any other goal for the world’s drug policy than a drug-free world.’

Mexico is one of the main countries to bear the brunt of the ‘war on drugs’, with about 100,000 deaths from drug-related violence since 2006, despite former president Felipe Calderón upping the ‘war effort’ and deploying 50,000 troops against the cartels.

The war on drugs in Mexico was ‘a farce and a terrible outcome for the population’, claims Anabel Hernández, Mexican journalist and author of Narcoland.

She accused a corrupt government, under Calderón, of working with the cartels. ‘Nothing was resolved,’ she said. ‘The result of the false war on drugs was terrible. When the Calderón government began, there were three major cartels. After the “war”, there are now more criminal organisations and also hundreds of criminals, independent crime cells and “security groups” that resemble paramilitaries. We are certainly worse off than ever.’

If governments were serious about tackling the trade, they would stop banks and businesses that launder the cartels’ money and also punish corrupt officials, Hernández argues.

Instead, in Mexico and elsewhere, people suffer the effects of violence, while the drugs keep flowing. Colombia’s president, Juan Manuel Santos, has called for new approaches to the war on drugs to ‘take away the violent profit that comes with drug trafficking’. He said: ‘If that means legalising, and the world thinks that’s the solution, I will welcome it. I’m not against it.’

Ann Fordham, executive director of the International Drug Policy Consortium, said: ‘The debate on drugs in Latin America is definitely opening up. Several governments in the region are no longer prepared to bear the high human and financial costs of the zero-tolerance, drug war ideology.

‘It’s led to unimaginable violence, overcrowded prisons and ever more powerful drug cartels. And it simply hasn’t worked – the drug trade is, unfortunately, as robust as ever. Uruguay has led the charge on this by taking this progressive step. Other governments will be watching closely and we expect at least a few to follow their lead.’

The US is largely seen as the driving force behind the war on drugs. But Max Daly, co-author of Narcomania, said: ‘The war on drugs is weakening. In America, the spiritual home of the global war on drugs, the decisions of individual states to legalise cannabis have made it tough for the US to criticise countries such as Uruguay. Colorado and Washington states are legalising all cannabis and many other states have already legalised medicinal cannabis.’

There are shifts elsewhere too. ‘In New Zealand, they’ve decided to regulate the raft of new drugs now being concocted, rather than ban them,’ said Daly.
‘Decriminalisation is being trialled to varying degrees in around 30 countries, including Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Chile, Mexico and Portugal.

Meanwhile, some countries like Thailand and China execute drug users and drug dealers. The UK’s one of the few countries that’s failed to at least experiment with drug laws. Any political party that suggests ending prohibition will get kicked out or not voted in, because they’ll get shot down as crazy hippies.’

The debate will run on. But many now see legalisation and regulation as preferable to an unwinnable, unending war.

‘We know prohibition has never worked, whilst demand remains,’ said Rolles. ‘So we have a choice: either responsible governments can take control of the drugs market or we leave it in the hands of violent criminal profiteers. There’s no third option in which drugs magically disappear.

‘Legal regulation needn’t mean a commercial free-for-all. We need to learn from the mistakes we’ve made with alcohol and tobacco, and get it right this time.’